If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You will have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI

Q 168: When a party encounters a Prismatic Wall, it appears as though the wall doesn't stop anyone from walking through it, they just get hit with all the negative effects. Is that right, or do they need to save to understand that they could walk through it?

Q 169: With a prismatic wall, how do you determine all the various saves for everything, is it just the standard DC + SPELL LEVEL + CASTER LEVEL?

Path of the Nefarious: A Way of the Wicked Journal.
Please take a look at the adventures of my group going through Fire Mountain Games's Way of the Wicked, An evil based Pathfinder Compatible adventure path. http://d20evil.blogspot.com/

Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI

A 168 They can't see through it, but nothing (aside from a healthy sense of self-preservation) prevents them from trying to walk through it. They'll have to survive the damage and pass the saves for the green, blue, and violet walls to actually make it through to the other side.

Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI

A 170 No.

Originally Posted by SRD - Inspire Courage

A bard with 3 or more ranks in a Perform skill can use song or poetics to inspire courage in his allies (including himself), bolstering them against fear and improving their combat abilities. To be affected, an ally must be able to hear the bard sing. The effect lasts for as long as the ally hears the bard sing and for 5 rounds thereafter. An affected ally receives a +1 morale bonus on saving throws against charm and fear effects and a +1 morale bonus on attack and weapon damage rolls. At 8th level, and every six bard levels thereafter, this bonus increases by 1 (+2 at 8th, +3 at 14th, and +4 at 20th). Inspire courage is a mind-affecting ability.

The damage bonus applies only to weapons.

"Nothing you can't spell will ever work." - Will Rogers

"What you must learn is that these rules are no different than the rules of a computer system. Some of them can be bent. Others can be broken." - Morpheus, The Matrix

Originally Posted by Krellen

Remember, Evil isn't "selfish". It's Evil. "Look out for number one" is a Neutral attitude. Evil looks out for number one while crushing number two.

Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI

Q 172

I have seen many things using the "willingly fail a save/check/etc" clause, and I know where some of the citations of this are. But I have not found one saying you can willingly fail a dispel check. Is there a specific provision by RAW to allow willing failures on dispel checks, or is it just an assumption extended from a more general clause? If it exists, can I have a link/book and page number?

Last edited by CommodoreCrunch; 2012-06-06 at 11:12 PM.

78% of DM's started their first campaign in a tavern. If you're one of the 22% that didn't, copy and paste this into your signature.
Started in a city plaza where a summoned Girallon promptly appeared and began causing havoc.

Path of the Nefarious: A Way of the Wicked Journal.
Please take a look at the adventures of my group going through Fire Mountain Games's Way of the Wicked, An evil based Pathfinder Compatible adventure path. http://d20evil.blogspot.com/

Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI

A 173 Correction

No. After the melee touch attack, which gets no special modifiers, and possible AoO the attacker makes a STR check opposed by the defender's STR or DEX Check, whichever modifier is higher. BAB is irrelevant. Every combatant gets a +4 for each size category he is larger than medium or a -4 for each size category he is smaller than medium. The target also gets a +4 if it has more than two legs or is otherwise exceptionally stable (like a dwarf for example)

In your example it is d20 + STR mod for the attacker and d20 + STR/DEX mod -4 for the defender.

Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI

Originally Posted by CommodoreCrunch

Q 172

I have seen many things using the "willingly fail a save/check/etc" clause, and I know where some of the citations of this are. But I have not found one saying you can willingly fail a dispel check. Is there a specific provision by RAW to allow willing failures on dispel checks, or is it just an assumption extended from a more general clause? If it exists, can I have a link/book and page number?

A 172

The only reference I can find at all to "voluntarily failing" in the Rules Compendium relates specifically to saving throws:

Originally Posted by RC p.112

VOLUNTARILY FAILING
A creature can voluntarily forego a saving throw and willingly accept a consequence.

The section on Caster Level checks makes no mention of intentionally failing.

There is a feat (Arcane Mastery, CArc p.73) that allows you to Take 10 on a CL check (which may, in turn, result in failure), but that's the only other option I am aware of.

Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI

A 175

Yes. Off the top of my head, mithral medium armor is treated as light armor (no speed reduction), and the Knight (PHB2) has a pair of class features that remove the movement penalties associated with wearing medium/heavy armour.

Frankly, I think the designers and novelists did great work in the post-Spellplague Realms. But, in the end, this wasn’t a new setting. It was the Realms, the Realms 100 years later, and therein lay the problem.

Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI

Originally Posted by Kuulvheysoon

A 175

Yes. Off the top of my head, mithral medium armor is treated as light armor (no speed reduction), and the Knight (PHB2) has a pair of class features that remove the movement penalties associated with wearing medium/heavy armour.

Thanks, but I was looking for the ability 30 or more ft. in a mithral full plate, if at all possible without taking levels in classes.

Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI

A 176 Uncertain

The rule as written does not seem to anticipate that possibility -- it is unclear on how multiples of 5 feet of speed (but not multiples of 10) should be handled. While there are several different reasonable interpretations or ways to adjudicate this rule, a hard-and-fast RAW answer may not be possible.

The most RAW-like answer I can give is to go back to the default rounding rules, which would say that since 25' is not a full 10' slower than 30', it rounds down to zero 10' increments less than 30', and therefore no penalty. (Likewise, a 15' speed would lead to only a -6 penalty, not -12 under that interpretation.) Without a clause to the effect of "or any portion thereof", I believe the rounding rule takes precedence from a RAW standpoint -- it clearly fits the intent for speeds greater than 30' (e.g., you wouldn't get a +4 bonus at 35', because you're not a full 10' faster than 30'.

Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI

A 175

A tooth of Dahlver-Nar (associated with Savnok) will let you ignore any movement penalty due to armor. It is a slotless magic item and costs 2000 GP (ToM pg. 77-79). The caveat is that you are always under the influence of Savnok (ToM pg. 45-47), so yo cannot ever undone your armor or drop a shield (if you pick one).

Addendum if you coonsider using the tooth you might want to look at the Restful enhancement from Dungeonscape pg. 39.

Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI

A 176 additional

While I think that Duke or URL has provided the correct RAW answer with regards to rounding, I feel it's notable to provide as evidence a monster statblock. The epic monster Genius Loci has a movement speed of 5 ft. and an associated -15 penalty to Jump checks (total mod +5 with a Strength of 50 and no ranks or other bonuses). This indicates that it may be the intention to halve the bonus/penalty when dealing with an increase or decrease of only 5 feet.

"Nothing you can't spell will ever work." - Will Rogers

"What you must learn is that these rules are no different than the rules of a computer system. Some of them can be bent. Others can be broken." - Morpheus, The Matrix

Originally Posted by Krellen

Remember, Evil isn't "selfish". It's Evil. "Look out for number one" is a Neutral attitude. Evil looks out for number one while crushing number two.

Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI

A 177: No, a Bloodstorm Blade does not get new maneuvers since it does not specifically say that it does. Personally, I've never understood why it's even in that book instead of a CW web enhancement or something.

Q 178: A character with 1 level in Abjurant Champion gains Extend Abjuration. Could that character apply the Extend Spell feat to an abjuration spell affected by said class feature, tripling (quadrupling?) the duration of the spell?

Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI

A 176, additional

And indeed that was one of the options I was considering when I discussed "reasonable interpretations". Making the bonus/penalty +2/-3 per 5' movement difference would seem to make the most sense from both a RAI and verisimilitude standpoint.

Re: Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI

Thanks for that, but I still need to know if anyone has a ruling somewhere for the actual sound that it makes.

A 167 additional Not that I am aware of.

This is the sort of thing that a DM must adjudicate for themselves. The SRD lists a number of DCs for the listen skill for various circumstances.

Originally Posted by SRD

{table]Listen DC|Sound
-10|A battle
0|People talking
5|A person in medium armor walking at a slow pace (10 ft./round) trying not to make any noise.
10|An unarmored person walking at a slow pace (15 ft./round) trying not to make any noise
15|A 1st-level rogue using Move Silently to sneak past the listener[/table]

Note that the DC of 10 equates to the average roll of an untrained individal with no dex bonus attempting to move silently. DC 15 equates to the average roll of a rogue with some skill ranks in move silent and a dex bonus. DC 5 equates to an individual attempting to move silently untrained with a armor check penalty. So you'd have to eyeball this yourself. For me I'd put it somewhere higher than 5 but lower than 10, and closer to 5. But this is rule 0 territory (DM Adjudication) and while rule 0 is RAW, the exact number is outside the scope of the thread.

This forum may use my name, simulated likeness, and/or words for any entertainment purposes or signature quotes.

Chairman Emeritus of Zinc Saucier. It is just like Iron Chef but comes with double the prize money.